Collagen dressing versus conventional dressings in burn and chronic wounds: a retrospective study

Objective: Biological dressings like collagen are impermeable to bacteria, and create the most physiological interface between the wound surface and the environment. Collagen dressings have other advantages over conventional dressings in terms of ease of application and being natural, non-immunogenic, non-pyrogenic, hypo-allergenic, and pain-free. This study aims to compare the efficacy of collagen dressing in treating burn and chronic wounds with that of conventional dressing materials.

Materials and methods: The records of 120 patients with chronic wounds of varied aetiologies and with mean age 43.7 years were collected and analyzed. The patients had been treated either with collagen or other conventional dressing materials including silver sulfadiazine, nadifloxacin, povidone iodine, or honey (traditional dressing material). Patients with co-morbidities that could grossly affect the wound healing like uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, chronic liver or renal disease, or major nutritional deprivation were not included. For the purpose of comparison the patients were divided into two groups; 'Collagen group' and 'Conventional group', each having 60 patients. For assessment the wound characteristics (size, edge, floor, slough, granulation tissue, and wound swab or pus culture sensitivity results) were recorded. With start of treatment, appearance of granulation tissue, completeness of healing, need for skin grafting, and patients' satisfaction was noted for each patient in both groups.

Results: With two weeks of treatment, 60% of the 'collagen group' wounds and only 42% of the 'conventional group' wounds were sterile (P=0.03). Healthy granulation tissue appeared earlier over collagen-dressed wounds than over conventionally treated wounds (P=0.03). After eight weeks, 52 (87%) of 'collagen group' wounds and 48 (80%) of 'conventional group' wounds were >75% healed (P=0.21). Eight patients in the 'collagen group' and 12 in the 'conventional group' needed partial split-skin grafting (P=0.04). Collagen-treated patients enjoyed early and more subjective mobility.

Conclusion: No significant better results in terms of completeness of healing of burn and chronic wounds between collagen dressing and conventional dressing were found. Collagen dressing, however, may avoid the need of skin grafting, and provides additional advantage of patients' compliance and comfort.